The word "Trinity" is not found in Holy Writ either -- but the concept is taught throughout the Bible nonetheless.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Why Calvinists and Arminianists are both wrong
- Thread starter Gup20
- Start date
The word "Trinity" is not found in Holy Writ either -- but the concept is taught throughout the Bible nonetheless.
Gup20
Active Member
We are not made sinners by one man, we are made dead by one man's sin.
Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also [is] the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, [which is] by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Rom 5:16 And not as [it was] by one that sinned, [so is] the gift: for the judgment [was] by one to condemnation, but the free gift [is] of many offences unto justification.
Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life.
It does not say "by one man's offense, sin reigned". It says "by one man's offense death reigned". The "judgment" it speaks of is death (the Curse). Rom 5:16 And not as [it was] by one that sinned, [so is] the gift: for the judgment [was] by one to condemnation, but the free gift [is] of many offences unto justification.
Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life.
You didn't ask me to speak to that, you stated that God's foreknowledge of who would be saved had nothing to do with God being outside of time, and then you said "So far as I know, you can’t show anywhere in Scripture that that argument is appealed to as a reason." Your underlying argument is that God's foreknowledge causes events to occur. Verse 8 shows how God being outside of time does indeed relate to his foreknowledge.
It pokes a hole in "irresistible grace" and thereby also in "perseverance of the saints". A TULIP cannot survive as TU. Seems like you may not be a 4 point calvinist afterall. What do they call 2 point Calvinists?
Intriguing. Though it does bring up a question. How does a Calvinist (2 point or 5 point) understand covenants. A covenant says "if you do A I will do Z". How does this work when one is totally depraved and cannot do A? How does this work with unconditional election which says "it doesn't matter if you do A, if you are not elected, I wont' do Z". It seems like a covenant requires participation on both ends to work, and Calvinism says we are unable to participate of our own free will or volition.
By saying Deuteronomy 30 applies only to the Jews in Israel, I think you were not.
It's a pretty unexplored idea, but I think it is exactly what the Apostle Paul says in Galatians. I don't want to get this thread off track, so I'll send it to you in a private message.
Gup20
Active Member
The Trinity isn't rejected by 85% of the world's Christian believers like Calvinism is, neither does it carry with it any controversy.
(I got the 85% number from looking for Calvinism surveys and finding this link: http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=23993)
The concepts are not found in Scripture either.
They sure are and in another post I outlined the concepts, it is only an ignorant mind that chooses not to see them.
Last edited by a moderator:
I believe the same can be said of the minority of believers who follow the concept.
Gup20
Active Member
You just said a man - John Calvin - and his ideas are on the same level as scripture. That is pure humanism - that a man determines truth.
Your almost obligatory answer will be "Calvin just echoed scripture", to which my obligatory response is "then why do you follow Calvin if we already have scripture"?
Gup20
Active Member
You should withdraw this offensive comment. You are directly calling anyone who does not agree with you "ignorant". This is not "speaking the truth in love".
Last edited by a moderator:
I stand by my post and withdraw nothing
For a guy who admits he knows nothing about Calvinism except what he found on a video presentation -- you sure make a lot of rash statements. Calvinists do not follow, put their faith in, or worship John Calvin.( You didn't say the last thing yet -- I just wanted to head you off at the pass.) Please speak the truth. Lying will not serve your cause.
The 15% who do not believe in the doctrine of the Trinity are not Christians.
Are you saying that the doctrinal concepts of the Trinity are not found in Scripture?!
"Do not rehearse five or six doctrines with unvarying monotony of repetition. Buy a theological barrel-organ, brethren, with five tunes accurately adjusted, and you will be qualified to practise as an ultra-Calvinistic preacher at Zoar and Jireh, if you also purchase at some vinegar factory a good supply of bitter, acrid abuse of Arminians, and duty-faith men. Brains and grace are optional, but the organ and the wormwood are indispensable. It is ours to perceive and rejoice in a wider range of truth. All that these good men hold of grace and sovereignty we maintain as firmly and boldly as they; but we dare not shut our eyes to other teachings of the word, and we feel bound to make full proof of our ministry, by declaring the whole counsel of God." ---Charles Spurgeon
Heavenly Pilgrim
New Member
HP: More than likely I could but God obviously knows I will not.
One thing is for certain, if I have no choice in the matter, there can be no morality involved, and as such no punishment or reward predicated of my being at McDonald’s. In any case I by no wise contradicted myself nor was I in any way playing word games. Your illustration was ambiguous and you did not give enough information to answer it any other way that to be as ambiguous as your illustration demanded my answer to be.
HP: Far to the contrary Pastor. God can indeed know things that will come to pass without in any way determining that it comes to pass. Only Augustinian Calvinism limits God’s foreknowledge to necessity as you are describing. God can and indeed does foreknow matters of perfect choice. Proof? He blames and praises men for those intents and subsequent actions. If he determined the outcome, any praise or blame would be either wicked or absurd, but by no means just. God is Just.
HP: I will honor that. We all have much to think through. I would ask you to consider the matter carefully, for IF you are going to say that the outcome is indeed one of necessity, and no other outcome is possible,( as in your illustration of going to McDonald’s) then God’s foreknowledge is in fact the cause, contrary to what you just said.
There are only two possible alternatives. Either God can foreknow matters of perfect choice and as such God is NOT the cause of the particular intent or action, or everything He knows is determined by His foreknowledge, in which case necessity rules and He alone can ONLY be the cause of all things including all evil.
Quote:
HP: Why do you limit an Omnipotent God to the foreknowledge of mere men?
HP: Let me explain why I said what I did. First, your illustration was not a moral illustration. There is nothing necessarily moral about going out to eat at McDonald’s. God could force or coerce me to do that, BUT he would not blame or praise me for the action due to it being the results of necessity. On the other hand if it was a moral issue at stake, one God would be just in praising or blaming me for, then force or coercion could not be the case. So, God can have foreknowledge both of things of necessity and things of pure choice. He could pick me up and place me at McDonald’s if He so desires, of which He can most certainly necessitate by his foreknowledge, or He can foreknow that I of my own free will choose for whatever reasons to go there without force or coercion. Now do you see why I said “more than likely I could?”
One thing is for certain, if I have no choice in the matter, there can be no morality involved, and as such no punishment or reward predicated of my being at McDonald’s. In any case I by no wise contradicted myself nor was I in any way playing word games. Your illustration was ambiguous and you did not give enough information to answer it any other way that to be as ambiguous as your illustration demanded my answer to be.
HP: Far to the contrary Pastor. God can indeed know things that will come to pass without in any way determining that it comes to pass. Only Augustinian Calvinism limits God’s foreknowledge to necessity as you are describing. God can and indeed does foreknow matters of perfect choice. Proof? He blames and praises men for those intents and subsequent actions. If he determined the outcome, any praise or blame would be either wicked or absurd, but by no means just. God is Just.
HP: I will honor that. We all have much to think through. I would ask you to consider the matter carefully, for IF you are going to say that the outcome is indeed one of necessity, and no other outcome is possible,( as in your illustration of going to McDonald’s) then God’s foreknowledge is in fact the cause, contrary to what you just said.
There are only two possible alternatives. Either God can foreknow matters of perfect choice and as such God is NOT the cause of the particular intent or action, or everything He knows is determined by His foreknowledge, in which case necessity rules and He alone can ONLY be the cause of all things including all evil.
Quote:
HP: Why do you limit an Omnipotent God to the foreknowledge of mere men?
HP: Simple. Our foreknowledge is limited. We can only know things that must of necessity come to pass. When one makes statements such as you made in your illustration that no other possibility can be possible if in fact one foreknows the outcome, you are limiting foreknowledge to the bounds we finite men are bound to, i.e., foreknowing matters of necessity only. God clearly possesses a foreknowledge greatly above that which man is limited to, foreknowing matters of perfect choice, foreknowing without causation. Back to your position. IF you believe that God can or does foreknow without causation, then you are going to have to take the position that something other than what comes to pass in such cases did indeed have some other possible possibility, but simply not chosen by the cause i.e., the cause being someone other than God. As in your illustration, you would have to conclude that the possibility had to exist that one did NOT have to go to McDonald’s in spite of God’s foreknowledge of the final choice one would make in regards to going or not. So far I see you as trying to take both positions which is not logically possible.
Last edited by a moderator:
No, we are made sinners. Romans 5:19 For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.
If it is simply death that is passed down, then you have non-sinful people dying which means that the wages of sin is not death (i.e., death really comes from something else). That raises a serious problems.
No, I have said that God's foreknowledge is not direct causation. And v. 8 does not address God being outside of time.That is not appealed to as a reason.
No it doesn't. 2 Peter 3:9 addresses neither.
Should be the same way everyone else understands them. There are basically three kinds: Promissory, Suzerainty, Parity. They are the same whether you are a Calvinist or not.
Then Z doesn't happen.
If you are not elected, you won't do A.
Depends on the type of covenant.
But that's not a covenant.
Read Deut 30. Have you been banished to another nation? of course not. that was Israel. Will God bring back to the land that Israel's fathers had (v. 5)? Of course not. Again, just read the passage in its context (with 28-29) and you will easily see that it applies only to Israel.
Which was precisely why I chose it.
You are missing the point. It doesn’t matter what the causation is. If God knows it, it cannot be any other way, regardless of what caused it.
No.
But this is not a biblical position.
I have already stipulated that. But God’s knowledge is infallible and therefore whatever he knows is true. It cannot be otherwise.
But that’s not a biblical position.
I have.
No, not at all. It can be that way, but it does not have to be that way.
It is nonexistent in the way that God’s foreknowledge work. We can at best make guesses. We can’t guarantee outcomes. God’s knowledge is different.
No. But when God knows something, it must necessarily come to pass.
I think you don’t understand what the point is. You need to wrestle with this some more. It is a good deal more simple than you are making it.
The point is simple:
1. God knows everything.
2. God's knowledge is infallible.
3. Whatever God knows must therefore be reality.
Conclusion: Whatever God knows about tomorrow will necessarily come to pass.
Otherwise his knowledge would be incomplete and fallible.
Heavenly Pilgrim
New Member
HP: OK. Take that as your position if you like, but there are some consequences in doing so. If something of necessity comes to pass it is a matter of necessity and not the results of choice period. That leads one to the inevitable conclusion of necessitated deterministic fatalism. God foreknows all so all must by necessity come to pass.
God also foreknows all evil, so if I take your position I would also have to assume that God is the Author of all evil, a most wicked and absurd conclusion indeed.
Last edited by a moderator: